Amendment to Section 4 Article 1 of the State code

Ainocra · Post by **Ainocra** » Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:25 pm

Currently it reads

Section 4: Pschent of Osiris]6

1. The Pschent will be the judicial council of Osiris, comprised of three Elders of the Pschent appointed by the Pharaoh with the approval of the Deshret. Elders of the Pschent will not serve as Pharaoh, Vizier, Scribe of the Hedjet, Guardian of the Atef, or Keeper of the Deshret and will not serve as junior officials for any of these offices for the duration of their service on the Pschent.

Several people have commented recently to the effect that we often wall off very capable individuals in the court. This clause renders them largely unable to contribute elsewhere if they so wished. I feel that a discussion on changing this is merited. Realistically I feel the only jobs that should be barred to them are Pharaoh, Vizier, and Keeper. By and large those that have sat on the court have been some of the longest serving and most trusted individuals the community has to offer. I've outlined a proposed change below.

Section 4: Pschent of Osiris]6

1. The Pschent will be the judicial council of Osiris, comprised of three Elders of the Pschent appointed by the Pharaoh with the approval of the Deshret. Elders of the Pschent will not serve as Pharaoh, Vizier, or Keeper of the Deshret for the duration of their service on the Pschent.

Thoughts?

Datford-Zyvetskistaahn · Fri Sep 25, 2015 4:41 pm

I am in two minds about the proposed amendments. Firstly, it was I that brought up the idea that the Pschent, by disqualifying its members from service in office elsewhere, limits the willingness of people to be appointed to it, because the Pschent is often inactive and so citizens who do want to contribute to the region are not inclined to join a branch that does little and prevents them from contributing in other ways, and also it means that those who are appointed to it (who, being the only Elder <.<, I wish to think are competent and trusted in our region) are not able to contribute as much as they would will to other parts of the region.

I think there is perhaps some difficulty with the Scribes of the Hedjet, in that they are liable to influence from the Pharaoh, however, one hopes that persons chosen as Elders will be stalwart enough to resist endeavours to influence them through any position they hold as Scribe and that it would be a foolhardy move for a Pharaoh to attempt to use such influence, for its reveal to the region at large would be so damaging politically.

I think also that the Scribes of Seshat (Justice), Sekhmet (War), and Bastet (Security), or future Scribes holding some variant of those portfolios, would pose a particular challenge, as these portfolios seem most likely to be involved in future actions before the Pschent (the Seshat for obvious reasons, the others because their portfolios are reasonably involved with actions that more regulated (in the sense that the Sekhmet, for example, would have a legal duty to execute a declared war, for example), that interact with the rights of citizens, or that might necessitate providing evidence or testimony to the Pschent). This difficulty could likely be overcome through an amendment to the proposal, if it cannot be so overcome then it would have to be the case that the Deshret is relied upon to simply not approve candidates who's proposed portfolios are inherently likely to conflict with their judicial duties.

Scribes with relation to cultural affairs and the WA, I think, are reasonable to open up to those who would also serve as Elders, if the Deshret feels convinced that their Elders will be of sufficient calibre to resist incidental pressure from the Pharaoh that may arise.

Removing the restriction on Guardians of the Atef also being Elders, I think, is also reasonable, though I can forsee instances where it may lead to conflicts of interest with their judicial role.

I'm going to have to say that I'm not sure on this one. My preferred solution, as I alluded to in the other thread, would be to have the judicial branch mostly eliminated in some fashion, as part of a larger reform, but I won't oppose this simply because it is my non-preferred option, even if I can't say that I support it.

Post by **Lord Ravenclaw** » Sat Sep 26, 2015 2:50 am

I support the amendment. We've never had any actual issues from the court in this region and when the Code was written, the community was expected to be far larger than it actually is.

Post by **Festavo** » Sat Sep 26, 2015 11:28 am

I support this amendment and motion to bring this amendment to a vote.

North East Somerset · Post by **North East Somerset** » Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:36 am

I agree with the proposed Amendment.

Joshua Bluteisen · Post by **Joshua Bluteisen** » Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:17 pm

No issues with this amendment. I second (third? NES didn't actually second it) the motion to vote.

Ainocra · Post by **Ainocra** » Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:49 am

Well then since Andrew is indisposed could we get a curator to bring this up to vote?

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Wed Sep 30, 2015 2:50 am

Ainocra wrote:Wed Sep 30, 2015 5:49 amWell then since Andrew is indisposed could we get a curator to bring this up to vote?

Im not too indisposed

But I cant bring this to vote as of yet as there need to be a second, second to the motion

Kyorgia · Post by **Kyorgia** » Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:11 am

Seconded

Ainocra · Post by **Ainocra** » Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:53 am

My apologies Keeper

and thanks Kyo